Minnesota House Bill HF23

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25
• Refer: 2/6/25
• Refer: 2/17/25
• Report Pass: 3/6/25
• Engrossed: 3/13/25
• Refer: 3/13/25

Caption

Whistleblower definitions provided, and whistleblower protections for public employees modified.

Summary

HF23 revises Minnesota’s whistleblower law by adding statutory definitions for key terms used in the whistleblower provisions. The bill defines “fraud” as an intentional or deceptive act or failure to act to gain an unlawful benefit, “misuse” as improper use of authority or position for personal gain or to cause harm, and “personal gain” to include benefits to the person and certain close family members. These definitions are intended to clarify when protected disclosures may involve fraud or misuse in public programs and state services. The bill also expands and clarifies the protected disclosures for state employees in the classified service. Under the amended language, a state employee who in good faith reports truthful and accurate information about state services, programs, or financing — including fraud or misuse within those programs — may make the disclosure not only to a legislator or the legislative auditor, but also to a constitutional officer, the employer, any governmental body, or a law enforcement official. The bill retains the rule that protected disclosures do not authorize release of data otherwise protected by law.

Impact

HF23 amends Minnesota Statutes sections 181.931 and 181.932, broadening and clarifying whistleblower protections for public employees and state employees. It adds definitions that will guide interpretation of whistleblower claims involving fraud, misuse, and personal gain, and it expands the list of recipients to whom certain state employees may report protected information. The practical effect is to strengthen reporting channels for concerns about state government operations while preserving existing confidentiality limits for protected data.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have broad support in the House, passing 133-0 on March 10, 2025, as amended. The unanimous vote suggests general agreement that the whistleblower statute needed clarification and that public employees should have clearer protections when reporting fraud or misuse. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows little visible opposition in the legislative history supplied.

Contention

The main policy issue in HF23 is how far whistleblower protections should extend for public employees and what kinds of disclosures should be covered. Potential points of contention include the breadth of the new definitions of “fraud,” “misuse,” and “personal gain,” and the expansion of protected reporting channels beyond legislators and the legislative auditor to employers, governmental bodies, and law enforcement. Another possible concern is balancing expanded reporting rights with the bill’s continued prohibition on disclosing data otherwise protected by law.